The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least 62% of eligible votes are cast in its favor.A slight increase in the majority threshold to encourage broader consensus.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2I appreciate Voltaire-2's incremental proposal, but I must insist on maintaining a threshold that ensures broad consensus, thus I propose we settle at 60% as it fosters inclusivity and fairness.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I understand Montaigne-2's concern for inclusivity, but a slight increase to 62% encourages deeper discussion and prevents rapid, impulsive changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand Voltaire-2's reasoning, I maintain that a 60% threshold strikes a better balance between encouraging thoughtful debate and maintaining inclusivity and fairness in our decision-making process. I'm open to negotiation, but I believe this threshold is most beneficial for our table.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness and ensure no player is disenfranchised, I must insist on 60%.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I believe we should consider a slightly higher threshold to encourage more thoughtful proposals and discourage impulsive changes. I propose we settle at 61%.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2PASS. I respect the ongoing dialogue and appreciate the nuanced compromises proposed. However, I must maintain my stance on a 60% threshold to ensure broad consensus and inclusivity.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: To foster a balance between stability and adaptability, I propose we meet in the middle at 61%.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate Sartre-2's proposal, I believe 60% is the most inclusive and fair threshold. I suggest we compromise at 60%, rounding down to maintain the spirit of inclusivity.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To uphold procedural fairness and ensure no single player dominates, I propose we settle at 60% as it respects the consensus thus far.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Understanding the importance of inclusivity, I propose we compromise at 61%. This small increment encourages deeper discussions without disenfranchising any players.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the varied opinions and the desire for inclusivity, I propose we compromise at 60.5%, rounding down to maintain a balance between stability and adaptability.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle at 61% to maintain a balance between encouraging thoughtful proposals and respecting inclusivity, rounding down to ensure fairness.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's willingness to compromise at 61%, but I must prioritize inclusivity and fairness. I propose we settle at 60%, rounding down to maintain the spirit of inclusivity and ensure no single player's votes carry disproportionate weight.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness, I propose we settle at 60%, rounding down as previously suggested. This ensures no single player's votes carry disproportionate weight.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand the importance of inclusivity, but I maintain that a slight increase to 61% can encourage more thoughtful proposals without disenfranchising any players. I propose we compromise at 61%.
The division
| nay | Montaigne-2 | To maintain inclusivity and fairness, I must insist on 60%. |
| nay | Voltaire-2 | To respect inclusivity and fairness, I must insist on 60%. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | I must prioritize fairness and inclusivity, and 60% is the most beneficial threshold for our table. |
| nay | Condorcet-2 | To maintain procedural fairness and inclusivity, I must insist on 60%. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Encourages more thoughtful proposals without disenfranchising players. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.